Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I blame GEORGE W. BUSH for the terrorist murder of Benazir Bhutto

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:08 AM
Original message
I blame GEORGE W. BUSH for the terrorist murder of Benazir Bhutto
Bush may not have carried out the attack, and he may not have ordered it. I doubt the orders came from any American governmental agency. However, Bush certainly helped foster terrorism in Pakistan. First, with his attack on the Taliban in Afghanistan, and secondly by helping to prop up that thug dictator Musharraf. The ONLY thing that *'s so-called "Global War on Terror" has done is to INCREASE terrorism, and to fuel the determination of these groups. You bet your ass that I hold this murderous war criminal, the one who STOLE two consecutive elections in this country, responsible for this heinous act!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:10 AM
Response to Original message
1. "Smirk." - Commander AWOL
Edited on Thu Dec-27-07 08:10 AM by SpiralHawk
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:11 AM
Response to Original message
2. ..that only stirs the pot of hatred more
Lets try to bring peace, which is what she would have wanted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oldtime dfl_er Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. I don't agree
I think it is Bush who stirs the pot of hatred, and the poster is absolutely right that Bush has propped up Musharef for his phony "war on terra". Only the truth can set us free.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xenotime Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #4
77. Agreed. His threats to Iran and others makes the world hate the US even more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #2
31. No, it doesn't..it assigns
the blame where it should be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChazII Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #2
44. Exactly.
That would be the best way to honor this brave woman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluerum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:15 AM
Response to Original message
3. He has assisted the Musharraf regime for years. He knows their interests
and ambitions. We all knew this was coming - it was just a matter of time.

May this brave honorable woman rest in peace. And may those who perpetrated this act suffer a thousand deaths.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudToBeBlueInRhody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:27 AM
Response to Original message
5. Oh well, the Freepers are just going to say we said it......
.....so we might as well say it......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #5
39. I could care less about what Freepers think or say
And I'm not about to "moderate" my viewpoint just because of what they might think about me. They already despise us, and I'd say many of them would love to see the entire lot of us locked up in some detention camp. Who gives a rat's ass what they think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #5
56. Just wondering, do you know if the freepers have blamed Bill Clinton yet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mwb970 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:30 AM
Response to Original message
6. bush's were errors of omission rather than commission.
It isn't that he actively caused the event, it's that he sat by passively and never did anything to prevent it. Distracted by Iraq, he allowed the situation to fester. bush and cheney both seem tone-deaf to the realities of this world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #6
34. Propping up Musharraf was key too -- another Condi foreign policy success?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:34 AM
Response to Original message
7. Seven degrees of George Bush: Let's do ... Bhutto's assassination.
We might need more than seven degrees. It's a huge stretch.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. Criminal negligence at best
Re-read my post. I didn't say that he was actively involved. But he did help inflame the hostility in Pakistan. By standing by Musharraf and fueling the hatred of the extremists in the region, he helped create the circumstances under which Bhutto was assassinated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #7
13. Nothing is "a huge stretch" from the most powerful person in the world.
He wields more power, has access to more information, more intelligence, more economic and political influence -- bullshit, that this is a stretch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #7
25. How about two.
George Bush paid Pervez Musharraf $2 billion.
Part of that money was spent paying the government (in)security which allowed a suicide bomber armed with guns into a political rally of Musharraf's main rival.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scriptor Ignotus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #25
30. there have been multiple assassination attempts on Musharraf
so how does that fit into your little master plan there?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #30
35. I give successful assassination attempts somewhat more weight.
Edited on Thu Dec-27-07 11:27 AM by lumberjack_jeff
It appears that the security forces are somewhat more diligent when protecting the guy who pays the bills.

I guess they call that LIHOP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:47 AM
Response to Reply #25
65. i thought it was $5 billion n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #65
82. You're probably right. They cut him one check for $2b in 2004. n/t
Edited on Fri Dec-28-07 10:08 AM by lumberjack_jeff
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Efilroft Sul Donating Member (827 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:39 AM
Response to Original message
8. Let's blame the actual assassin for once.
Otherwise, we may as well blame Reagan for Indira Ghandi's assassination in 1984, the elder Bush for Rajiv Ghandi's assassination in 1991 -- and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto's assassination on Jimmy Carter in 1979.

Fundamentalist crazies perform political assassinations in that part of the world in all kinds of seasons, no matter who we have as our President.

What a tragic loss.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #8
27. There is a valid argument that the only superpower in the world
Disproportionately influences events, though. It is at least arguable that many of these incidents might not have taken place. The US is always seeking to influence the politics of other countries and if it left them alone, it is possible that the infighting would not be as severe. So I can kind of get where the OP comes from. True there would still be assassinations in other countries, some by lone nuts and some for internal reasons, but with the sole superpower being the way it is, there is also the possibility of the superpower's interference or influence contributing to the problem. As US citizens we have some responsibility.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Efilroft Sul Donating Member (827 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #27
41. Islamic militants hated the USA long before Bush 43 came along.
One could make an argument the Islamic world has a valid grudge against us going back to the Eisenhower administration, when the CIA toppled the elected government of Iran in favor of the Shah. But that's beside the point.

The point is, Islamic militants didn't like us when the world was divided up between two superpowers during the Cold War. And they won't like us in a multipolar world with the USA, EU, China, Russia, and India shaping world events, either. They just won't like America -- period -- no matter how benevolent our nation is.

For better or for worse, America is always going to have a major influence upon world events. With the assassination of Bhutto, now is not the time for liberals and Democrats to try and outsprint each other in the Blame America First Race. Bhutto's assassination is the responsibility of Islamic militants and Islamic militants alone, and they would've killed Bhutto or any other such political figure whether Bush, Gore, or Kerry was in the Oval Office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #41
48. They don't like us because of our interference
And our acting like they should live according to our interests.

Arguably if the US just minded it own business from the time of the Eisenhower Administration, the Islamic Revolutions wouldn't have happened. Most of the countries were getting more and more modern and liberal, within Islamic tradition. The Islamic backlash could be due in great part to the attempt to resist the U.S., etc., interfering.

Your last paragraph is right from the Republican playbook. The idea "they hate us" is, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #48
59. I see you saw through the poster's bull shit. You are right, straight out of the Repuke handbook.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Efilroft Sul Donating Member (827 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 08:24 AM
Response to Reply #59
75. Thank goodness you aren't in charge of foreign affairs or national security.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Efilroft Sul Donating Member (827 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 08:22 AM
Response to Reply #48
74. Pakistan getting a grip on itself is in our national interest.
Edited on Fri Dec-28-07 08:27 AM by Efilroft Sul
Whether Pakistan is rooting out al Qaeda on its frontier with Afghanistan, or securing its nuclear arsenal, or restoring democracy, what Pakistan should be doing is in our interest. And not just American interests, but its neighbors' national interests as well.

The problems with Pakistan could very well exist past the Bush administration. What are you going to do if a Democrat is elected President in 2008? He or she is going to have to handle these matters realistically, and he or she is going to have the same national interests with Pakistan that I cited above. Just because the President won't be Bush isn't going to make our foreign policy magically righteous, and he or she isn't going to cause Islamic militants lay down their arms after an oath of office is taken.

Look beyond Bush. My concerns about Pakistan aren't about political grandstanding but national security.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Didereaux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:43 AM
Response to Original message
9. Cheney! goddamit Cheney! not the chimp, the pet. the OWNER the real President!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
10. Not everything can be blamed on * --- This woman had MANY enemies
I hold whomever killed her responsible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DangerDave921 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #10
26. Reasoned debate
There are those on here who engage in spirited debate and there are those who just hate Georgie so much that they want to lay all the world's ills at his feet. Let's hold Georgie accountable for all the things he IS accountable for, without reaching to find ones. That just dilutes any valid criticism.

Terrible loss today.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flordehinojos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 09:32 AM
Response to Original message
12. poppy's undercover CIA hands well trained in undercover attacks ...
never there, never him, always dirty, dirty hands ready to .... uphold and defend bush supremacy, carlysle group, and halliburton oil anywhere, anytime in the world ... think POPPY BUSH!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. Bhutto campaigned on getting rid of the Al Qaeda groups along the Afghanistan/Pakistan border. I see
this as playing right into the Cheney/Poppy Bush agenda. This keeps their "war on terror" ALIVE to fight for years to come. More money for the military. More propaganda for the repuke candidates (I've heard THAT already from Mr/ 911 himself...Giuliani). More money for Halliburton. More money in the pockets of the warmongers.

If the warmongering thugs in the WH wanted AlQaeda off the Pakistan/Afghanistan border, they would have been gone YEARS ago. We have to remember....the psycho-in-chief and Musharref are good buddies. Bhutto's assassination only works in the warmonger's favor. I somehow doubt the warmonger's hands are completely clean in this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:55 AM
Response to Reply #15
66. my god--i just knew i couldn't be the only one thinking this way!
it sounds great for bush to say he supported bhutto, but if she had won he had a lot to lose. (war on terror bullshit)

also--what *if* she had gone after bin laden? caught him? damn! bushie's saudi friends would be really pissed wouldn't they?

yes, a ton of things went through my head today about this--and as olbermann (or someone on his show) pointed out--these "extremists" don't usually have a gun, shoot the victim & then blow themselves up. at least not traditionally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flordehinojos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:29 AM
Response to Reply #66
67. and why did bush's eye-blinking rate go wild during his "brief statement" before the television
cameras as he said, ,

"murderous extremists ...", "those who committed this crime must be brought to justice" ... "she refused to allow assassins to dictatate the course of her country ..." "...forces of terror and extremism".

I believe that if the eye blinking rate of a lying ovaloffice squatter might be taken as a measure of truth or lack thereof, one might think that bush knew who killed benazir bhutto, and that in calling for the assassins to come to justice, he knew that he was signing his own sentence to be brought to justice!

WHAT DID BUSH KNOW AND WHEN DID HE KNOW IT?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Efilroft Sul Donating Member (827 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #12
16. What's the benefit in further destabilizing a Muslim country with nukes?
There's no great amount of oil in Pakistan, so that takes out the "usual" Halliburton motive.

Musharraf's government could topple in the wake of Bhutto's assassination, so that cancels any benefit of the Carlysle Group selling weapons there, especially if the crazies take over and get their hands on the nukes.

People, the loss of Benazir Bhutto is to nobody's benefit except to the group that pulled it off (bigger street cred in the short term, global threat in the long term). The situation in Pakistan isn't a parlor game. Nor is it a bid for greater Bush supremacy. Pakistan today suffered an attack of real terrorism with potentially far-reaching implications that can very quickly get beyond anyone's control. Bhutto's assassination is a pressing matter for the entire world (especially Pakistan's neighbors), and nobody in his or her right mind wants to see a nuclear Pakistan fall to pieces.

Let us call the enemy, Bhutto's assassins, by their real name: Islamic militants.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #16
33. Could be Islamic Militants. Could be Disaster Capitalists. We don't really know.
Islamic Militants have a history of assassinating secular enemies. Disaster Capitalists have a history of assassinating left-socialist enemies. Neither group wants peace and order, both need chaos to push through their funadmentalist agendas regardless of material agendas (oil, etc.) Neither group is concerned about regional stability either.

We probably won't know all the factors of what's happening and who is manipulating what until the dust settles. We may never know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Efilroft Sul Donating Member (827 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #33
38. There's chaos, and then there's chaos.
A nuclear-armed Pakistan destabilized by Islamic militants could be more for the Disaster Capitalists (as you say) to chew than they can bite off.

Bhutto's assassination was the work of Islamic militants. They are the primary beneficiaries of this terrorist act. Disaster Capitalists aren't even close to being secondary beneficiaries.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #16
60. Are you saying that since it doesn't seem rational, the chimp can't be involded. Have you already
forgotten that we went to war with a country for having wmd, when there was none. You keep carrying the water.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Efilroft Sul Donating Member (827 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 08:09 AM
Response to Reply #60
73. And you keep drinking the Kool-Aid.
Bhutto was taken down by Islamic militants within her own country who regularly employ assassination as a tool. Her enemies were legion. In contrast here, she was somebody whom the Bush administration and the one to follow saw and would see as a good business partner for the United States and its interests.

Want an oil pipeline across Pakistan? Energy companies preferred Bhutto, who would have rooted out the extremists and kept a pipeline safe.

Want to keep Pakistani nukes in the hands of someone rational? Security experts here were optimistic about Bhutto.

Want someone with superstar status to bring democracy back to an Islamic nation? Believe it or not, our government was pulling for Bhutto.

This time, the tin-foil hat brigade has it all wrong. Pakistan and Iraq are two different matters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 09:43 AM
Response to Original message
14. "attack on the Taliban in Afghanistan?"
You believe that we should have just played nice with the Taliban while they harbored bin Laden after 9/11? Even Dennis Kucinich voted to authorize the use of force against the Taliban, and he is about the biggest peacenik there is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #14
17. That idiocy has gotten more popular around here- slowly- over the years. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #14
18. What good has it done?
Compare the approach * took with Afghanistan to the approach Clinton took with Libya. In the former case, we've lost hundreds of American lives, and over six years later we STILL haven't captured the two primary targets we went in after. In the latter case, we used diplomatic and economic pressure, and Libya eventually cooperated with us and handed over the suspects we were after.

By going into Afghanistan, and then diverting attention to Iraq and not finishing the job, * has only served to make things much WORSE in the region.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kingofalldems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #14
37. Peacenik
A term used by RW repubs to disparage any Democrat who opposes them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DadOf2LittleAngels Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
19. I actually blame the person who killed her..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #19
22. Not a "big picture" kind of guy, eh?
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DadOf2LittleAngels Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #22
23. The primary blame for any act lies in he who commited it
I dont blame Bill clinton for the attacks of Christians in Kosovo..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #23
61. I would like to know who ordered it and why. The person who did it is just carrying out orders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlCzervik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
20. Pakistan had major issues and upheaval before Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. And instead of trying to smooth things over, Bush actually intensifies their hatred
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 10:54 AM
Response to Original message
24. I blame Barbara.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vssmith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
28. I heard Bush call it a cowardly act
Yea! right. Like he would have enough courage to blow himself up.

Maybe call it an evil act but certainly not cowardly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flordehinojos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 06:44 AM
Response to Reply #28
68. did his eyes blink like hell when he said, "cowardly act" ...i think his blinking eyes denounced him
in whatever ways or however he and his poppy's trained undercover cia hands may be involved in bhutto's assassination.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scriptor Ignotus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
29. sorry but this is BS
this has NOTHING to do with Bush. NOTHING.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #29
32. Nothing whatsoever?
So you're saying that Bush hasn't been trying to prop up the dictator Musharraf? Or that his "war on terror" hasn't served to increase terrorism?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #29
40. Egads!!! Do you live under a rock or something?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scriptor Ignotus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #40
43. newsflash to DU
crazy religious people with guns live all over the world. Some of these crazy people have hated America for decades. Some hate women for various reasons. Some hate our Westernized culture (our freedoms?).

you're going to blame Bush for this assassination? then blame Judas Priest for those boys committing suicide so many years ago. blame video games for all the recent school shootings. hell, nobody is responsible for their own actions anymore, how about I go get piss drunk, run my car over an old lady and then blame Bud Light for getting me so drunk? can't we blame the a-hole that pulled the fucking trigger? can we not do that anymore???

what a crock of bull. This woman would have been assassinated under President Al Gore just as she would have been shot under a President John Kerry.

The world may indeed be a more dangerous place because of Bush, but he is not necessarily responsible for every heinous crime that occurs on this planet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #43
53. Wow that's the propaganda * & Faux news want you to believe: That they ALL hate us over "there".
Newsflash for ya: That propaganda faux news is feeding you is A TOTAL CROCK OF BULLSHIT.

What the people in the middle east hate is what our government is doing and has done for years and years and years all over the world.

Sorry, but the people over "there" do NOT hate the good people of this country and they do NOT hate our freedom.

They just want to be left the fuck alone and live their lives as they choose. FREELY.

But our government and the powers that be won't allow it because there is too much money to be made off the natural resources in the middle east.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scriptor Ignotus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #53
78. some do, some don't
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyid_Qutb

read about this guy and tell me how you're right and I'm wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 07:45 AM
Response to Reply #43
72. Wow - they really do hate us for our freedom?
What a crock of BULLSHIT, I reject that premise completely. Do you also believe that there is a worldwide Islamo-facist movement, intent on overthrowing the United States, and installing Islamic sharia law?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scriptor Ignotus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #72
79. not take us over
but certainly to destroy our dominance. this is undeniable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyid_Qutb



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #79
83. Your link is to Wikipedia - see the special note towards the top of the page?
"The neutrality of this article is disputed.
Please see the discussion on the talk page.(December 2007)
Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sayyid_Qutb

The link points out a few inconsistencies with that Wiki entry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scriptor Ignotus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #83
84. well we should take everything from wikipedia
with a grain of salt, but there are excerpts from Qutb's own hand in that entry.

anyway how about these sources instead?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,584478,00.htm...

Bush and Co. have exaggerated the power of these types of individuals, but it is a fallacy to say they don't exist at all. They are out there and they are indeed, quite dangerous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #84
85. I don't doubt there are a few extremists who would like to see Islamic law worldwide
Just like there are more than a few Christian types (Dominionists) who would love to see a strict Christian-based legal system instituted. But I don't think there is a concerted, well-organized, world-wide effort to bring down the United States and institute a Islamic caliphate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #29
42. 'NOTHING! NOTHING!' Hoo boy . . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #29
46. Nothing to do with bush?
Edited on Thu Dec-27-07 05:51 PM by seemslikeadream
are you kidding me?

You have heard of A Q Khan?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IsItJustMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:22 PM
Response to Reply #29
62. How do you know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scriptor Ignotus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #62
81. you're right
Bush masterminded the whole thing. That evil genius George W Bush really is a shifty bastard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eurobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
36. And the puppets remain...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
45. This Is Really Really Stupid, No Offense. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #45
51. No it's not. This is exactly what * & Co want. And your post does offend. nt.
Edited on Thu Dec-27-07 06:29 PM by TheGoldenRule
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #51
55. No, Really, It Really Really Is.
It's just plain dumb, in fact.

When totally unrelated shit like this gets blamed on *, it always comes off as really stupid. There's enough REAL shit to blame him for. Having to play 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon as it relates to bush, with every damn thing that happens, is just really quite silly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #55
57. Nice to see you back
and well in form. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #55
63. Not related? Where'd you hear that? On Faux News?
:eyes:

BTW-Tigers don't change their stripes. But you know that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 07:42 AM
Response to Reply #55
70. How nice of you to skip over everything I've said and wash it all away
Notice I did NOT say that Bush was directly involved.

However, I DID say that Bush has helped to lay the groundwork for what happened. Sure, there's always been a degree of unrest in the region. But Bush, through his actions and policies - especially standing by Musharraf over the past few months - has only helped make things much worse in the region.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
47. my sibling pointed out...
why weren't we providing some protection for her??? We know Musharraf had declared martial law recently, and many think he's not very Democratic in nature, so why wouldn't we provide some anti-terrorism protection force for her? Just saying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #47
49. Why wasn't she wearing a Dragonskin Vest?
She could have afforded one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:29 AM
Response to Reply #49
64. another good point... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 06:14 PM
Original message
whatever...
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 06:14 PM
Response to Original message
50. People need to figure out who the REAL TERRORISTS are. After that, it all falls into place. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 06:25 PM
Response to Original message
52. Americans dismally uninformed about deceit duplicity ulterior motives behind America's manipulation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
focusfan Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
54. Bush is probably half nazi
it wouldn't suprise me if he wasn't kin to Hitler
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roamer65 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-27-07 08:12 PM
Response to Original message
58. Imagine if we actually went after Al-Qaeda instead of invading Iraq.
If we had dealt with Osama Bin Forgotten and Al-Zawahiri, instead of ignoring them, we may not have seen the events of today. The incompetence of * is nothing less than amazing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BushOut06 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 07:44 AM
Response to Reply #58
71. Exactly
While I may personally think that we should have handled the Taliban differently (we didn't invade Libya for refusing to hand over the suspects in the PanAm bombing), we should have at least done the job right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 06:47 AM
Response to Original message
69. Yes
Pakistan was all peace and rainbows before Bush became President. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SIMPLYB1980 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 09:12 AM
Response to Original message
76. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 10:05 AM
Response to Original message
80. K&R for the entertainment value
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Jul 29th 2014, 02:29 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC